[graap-wg] minutes from 4/24 telecon

[Heiko Ludwig]

The ContinuingFaultType is the specific WS-Agreement fault that we 
defined. I don't know anymore the rationale why it was called that name, 
but we might want to have a sepate fault type.

Karl, do you rember the semantics of this name?

Heiko

-----
Heiko Ludwig, Dr. rer. pol.
IBM TJ Watson Research Center, PO Box 704, Yorktown, NY, 10598
hludwig at us.ibm.com, tel. +1 914 784 7160,  mob. +1 646 675 8469
http://www.research.ibm.com/people/h/hludwig/





Jim Pruyne <jim_pruyne at hp.com> 
Sent by: owner-graap-wg at ggf.org
04/24/2006 11:31 AM

To
GRAAP-WG <graap-wg at gridforum.org>
cc

Subject
[graap-wg] minutes from 4/24 telecon






Minutes are attached.  The next telecon will be held on May 3, at the 
usual Wed. time.  At this time, we intend to survey the state of the 
document, and determine any steps needed to submit back to GGF.

--- Jim


                     Minutes from the April 24, 2006 GRAAP Telecon

Attendees
---------
Toshi Nakata
Jim Pruyne
Chris Dabrowski
Asit Dan

Discussion
----------

- Spreadsheet row 41: We'd like Heiko to respond about whether there's
  still a need for the ContinuingFaultType, if not, we'd like to
  delete.

- Jim to run the schema as defined in the document through the Axis
  tool chain to verify the correctness.

- Jim to make sure that all of the comments in the comment tracker
  have appropriate responses.

- Spreadsheet row 37: We agreed that even if accept fails, the
  agreement is still accepted, and the initiator must query to find
  out the status.  It would be up to the responder to use other
  mechanisms like signing or reliable delivery if they do not want to
  risk accepting an agreement that comes from an invalid source.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.ogf.org/pipermail/graap-wg/attachments/20060424/8d6dbb3b/attachment.html